John Hagel on Passion and Wisdom.

We have another excellent article written by John Hagel on the dynamic interaction between passion and wisdom. How these elements interactions increase organizational performance beyond what either can deliver in isolation. Hagel notes.

I want to challenge this belief.  In fact, passion and wisdom amplify each other – each one alone has far less impact than when the two are combined. Rather than opposites, these two are powerful complements.

It is my opinion, that the oil and gas industry has no passion; and is operated completely from the basis of wisdom. For that statement I would probably receive little argument and be perceived to not have insulted anyone. And I have not intentionally set out to insult anyone, its that the need to have a level of passion within the industry is something that is necessary, and that is what I and Hagel are arguing.

Wisdom in isolation falls prey to diminishing returns.  No matter how thoughtful and creative we might be, we ultimately run up against the limits of current capability.  The longer we work at it, the harder it becomes to find the next increment of value within current performance limits.

Today we have an economy that is in a major transition, that is redefining the players in all industries and in all marketplaces. We also have a set of technologies, the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) redefining how business is conducted throughout all industries. These transition are also defining how the oil and gas industry is being conducted in fundamental ways.

In a world of mounting performance pressure where current limits become prisons that ultimately crush participants,effectively integrating wisdom and passion is not just an opportunity, it is an imperative.

From my perspective little to no passion exists in the oil and gas industry. The wisdom that Hagel notes that can imprison organizations appears to have asphyxiated oil and gas firms with an overdose of paper. Over the past decade firms have been rewarded with higher commodity prices. However at the same time costs have escalated at substantially the same or even higher factors. Since 2005 world oil production has stalled with no substantial increases seen in any region, and no increases seen in the foreseeable future. Regions such as Canada, and others, are seeing steep declines in their natural gas deliverability. The industry is ripe with wisdom and lacking in passion at a time when the challenges are the greatest the industry has ever faced. If only the industry were to adopt the Draft Specification and commence the development of the People, Ideas & Objects software applications. Passion could begin to be effectively integrated with the wisdom resident in the industry, and affect the performance of the industry in the manner that Hagel notes in this article.

For the industry to successfully provide for the consumers energy demands, it’s necessary to build the systems that identify and support the Joint Operating Committee. Building the Preliminary Specification is the focus of People, Ideas & Objects. Producers are encouraged to contact me in order to support our Revenue Model and begin their participation in these communities. Those individuals that are interested in joining People, Ideas & Objects can join me here and begin building the software necessary for the successful and innovative oil and gas industry.

S + B, Big Oil and the Natural Gas Bonanza

Booz & Co’s periodical Strategy + Business have published a paper that asks the question;

The oil majors hope to make major money in natural gas, but can they learn to operate two distinct types of businesses under one roof?

Noting that unconventional gas requires a different business model that may not be served by the conventional methods of the industry.

The unexpected revival of natural gas is quietly precipitating a fundamental shift in the oil and gas industry — a shift that few companies were prepared for but that may determine the industry’s overall future makeup. It pits the major oil companies against the independents, which have plied the unconventional reservoirs doggedly over the last seven to 10 years. And it raises questions about whether the oil giants can become big players in this new unconventional gas business. To do so, they will have to develop dual operating models under one roof — one, a traditional high-risk, corporate-led exploration model, and the other, a nimble, efficient, and decentralized operation. In other industries (notably airlines), such two-headed strategies have generally failed.

Change is certainly in the air. Oil and gas prices are probably one of the best measures of the level of change in the oil and gas industry. It is pleasant to see Strategy + Business’ analysis providing confirmation to many of the things that we have stated here. This critique is to ensure the innovative producers remain successful.

In order to compete in unconventional assets, oil majors will have to embrace a dual operating model — in essence, pairing traditional operations with separate and more agile business units modeled after the independent gas firms, with flatter organizations, simpler governance structures, and an emphasis on efficiency and innovation. These attributes are necessary to reduce operating costs, as well as to allow the firms to quickly adapt new well designs, source local contractors and materials, and secure labor as needed.

What concerns me is the nature of the oil and gas industry towards new ideas. There is a culture of how management will not support new ideas, which includes this software development project. I have attributed this to the 1980’s and 1990’s survival strategies that were a necessity in oil and gas. Times have changed and its time for the management to realize they have to act. S + B note.

Above all, management will need to ensure that existing processes and structures do not discount these fresh ideas because of a “not invented here” bias. If a joint venture is part of this approach, the company will need to develop a plan that allows it to learn from the arrangement, by creating formal and informal governance mechanisms to promote the transfer and dissemination of knowledge.

I am under no illusions at the scope of change that we are introducing in this project. Using the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the innovative producer will be necessary at some point in the very near future. An idea that resonates with those in the business as something we should have been doing all along. By delaying this project, one in which we have many years of work ahead of us, I believe is dangerous.

If designed and managed appropriately, either strategy could be successful, but history suggests that most of the oil giants will struggle to make dual operating models coexist. Though it may not seem obvious today, many of these companies are likely to find that the technical hurdles of unconventional reserves are relatively minor. Far tougher — and ultimately out of reach for some — will be the challenge of changing behavior and culture. 

For the industry to successfully provide for the consumers energy demands, it’s necessary to build the systems that identify and support the Joint Operating Committee. Building the Preliminary Specification is the focus of People, Ideas & Objects. Producers are encouraged to contact me in order to support our Revenue Model and begin their participation in these communities. Those individuals that are interested in joining People, Ideas & Objects can join me here and begin building the software necessary for the successful and innovative oil and gas industry.

Technorati Tags: People's Change Exploration Energy Innovation Management Organization Strategy

Hofmeister on BP's plans

Former Shell Oil Company president has the following comments on Bloomberg today.

It's very important for BP to turn the page so to speak, although they still have the well to put out, and hopefully that will go according to plans over the next couple of weeks. But they have to turn their attention to the future. And part of that future in addition to the asset sales is getting on with what I call the boring bits of business, and that is, under John Browne they did a great job of expanding the portfolio and growing the company. But I don't think they ever integrated the company and turned it into a high performing institution, that takes a lot of time and Tony Hayward saw this and started the process but didn't get far enough. Now I think its time to really get into the structures, processes, systems the procedures so that the whole company operates the same way all over the world. 

Makes at least two people that think the boring bits of business are needed.

Technorati Tags: People's Change Energy Firm Ideas Management Organization

The China Syndrome

In a recent post we highlighted the EIA’s revised energy supply forecast. The chart from that post shows a 1 million barrel per day reduction in current production volumes. Econbrowser is now publishing anlysis of the EIA’s energy demand forecast, focusing on the impact that China will have in the marketplace. 

Providing the market with adequate energy supplies would be a difficult issue on its own. Adding the unprecedented demand expected from China, provides a real opportunity for the innovative oil and gas producer. The author of the econbrowser article, Stephen Kopits notes an interesting characteristic of energy demand.

Oil demand does not grow linearly with GDP. Rather, the bulk of oil demand growth occurs in the two decades during which societies typically acquire motor vehicles, after which per capita oil demand flattens. For example, per capita oil consumption in the United States is today lower than it was in 1979, even though per capita income has increased substantially since.

That is not to say that the U.S. demand for energy has dropped. The focus on motor vehicles alone, which is what Kopits reviews, would therefore limit the potential demand from China to just that form of consumption. If we are to gain an understanding of the volume of potential demand from China, motor vehicles will be a portion of that demand, but not the sole source of the demand increase. Now the scary part of the analysis. Comparing the per capita increases in energy use of Japan (1960 - 1973) and Korea (1976 - 1996) and using either of those trajectories in China’s situation shows...

In any event, without delving deeper, we might expect China's steady state demand for oil could prove not less than that of more advanced Asian nations. Based on the experience of Korea and Japan, China's current population would be expected to consume approximately 55 mbpd at steady state (when per capita consumption plateaus), or nearly 2/3 of current global oil production, were the supply available.

One might argue that this is an unreasonable amount of energy consumption. It imputes systemic gridlock throughout China, and therefore would define the upper limit of what is possible. Nonetheless the volume of energy demand will be substantial. In this next quotation Kopits argues that the EIA’s forecast demand is similarly too low.

By contrast, the EIA sees China's oil consumption at only 10 mbpd for 2015, a growth rate of approximately 2.7% from current levels, and at only 16 mbpd by 2030. Is this consistent with a country whose vehicle sales are up 56% in the first five months of the year? Where sales of Audi's are up 77% and those of BMW have doubled compared to the first five months of last year? Is China truly going to be satisfied, as the EIA would have it, with less than 1/5th of the per capita oil consumption of Korea in 2030, even though they should be similar by that time?

and

The differences in views about China's oil demand outlook have enormous policy implications. If the EIA is right, and China will forget how to grow, then pressures on the oil supply will be modest. On the other hand, if China is to develop like other countries in Asia, the pressure on the oil supply will be crushing, with oil shocks, recessions, and war all conceivable outcomes. The energy--as well as the economic and security--policy differences between the two scenarios are like night and day.

I don’t think it has to be that way. Call me an optimist but I think that whatever China, the U.S. and all others need in terms of energy, it is possible to supply them at prices that reflect that demand. The costs associated with the exploration and production will be substantially higher then what they are today. The easy stuff is gone, that is something that we can all agree on. The prices and volumes of production are unknown at this time, with demand growth from China, the oil and gas business has moved into a different era of operations. We know that a commodity like oil or gas is affected by the demand from China no matter where the source of production is. 


Today’s oil and gas firms, particularly the large Independents and International Oil Companies are having difficulty generating value. The cost structures have caught up to the commodities prices and the performance of these bureaucratic firms is diminishing rapidly. If we look forward to 2030 we can assume that the way these firms are managed today will be history. No one would establish a firm today to operate in the fashion of the bureaucracy in 2030. 


What we do know about 2030 is that the industry will be using advanced systems to manage their operations. It is also reasonable to assume that the Joint Operating Committee (JOC) will be the key organizational construct of the innovative producer. The use of both the technology and the JOC will be decided upon today. Approaching issues that are as broad in scope as the supply and demand of energy, that present this level of opportunity, can not be approached in the same old bureaucratic fashion. We need to pursue a definitive course of action, by developing the Draft Specification of People, Ideas & Objects. 


Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the world's oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As has been proven, this reorganization could achieve far greater oil and gas production. Management of the industry is conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so requires the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's China Economics Energy IEA Leadership Organization Vision

Energy demand in 2030

An interesting comment is made on the BBC regarding the projected 2030 demand for energy.

Oil found in deep waters is needed because the world will need 45% more energy by the year 2030, BP's chief of staff, Steve Westwell, earlier told the World National Oil Companies Congress.

The past five years has seen the global production of oil stall at around 85 million barrels per day. And in 2010 we know that global oil production has declined by one million barrels. Therefore it would seem this comment appears rather optimistic.

How will producers increase production by 45% in the next 20 years when they haven’t been able to sustain 2005 production volumes. Is it expected that the bureaucracies will suddenly begin to substantially outperform their recent past?

The appropriate thing we need to do is to begin the development of systems that define and support the innovative oil and gas producer.  Systems that use the Joint Operating Committee in the manner that is described in People, Ideas & Objects Draft Specification.

To approach a problem of this magnitude, of meeting the markets demand for energy, without first organizing ourselves for the challenge will only lead to disaster.

Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the world's oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As has been proven, this reorganization could achieve far greater oil and gas production. Management of the industry is conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so requires the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Energy, failure, Innovation, organization

John Hoffmeister

Former Shell Oil Company President John Hofmeister is in the news today and seems to be everywhere. Booz & Company have pre-released this article entitled "Why We Hate the Oil Companies". This article is a summary of his upcoming book by the same title, and it has some interesting points of view. Hofmeister is concerned, as we are at People, Ideas & Objects, about the demand side of the energy equation.

Total energy use in the United States has tripled in the six decades since 1950. Consumption has also shifted from manufacturing to residential and commercial use; much of this growth can be traced directly to the increased use of computers and associated servers, printers, and other devices. With the massive populations of the world’s emerging economies, the spiral of energy demand is accelerating. But both governments and the energy industry are dismally unprepared for a future of rapidly rising energy demand and insufficient sources of supply. pp. 2 - 3

And in a related article published by worldoil.com (Page 3).

More recently, despite the high oil price “wake up” call delivered to the US during the period 2005-2008, policymakers have been unable or unwilling to address the nation’s energy security, economic competitiveness that comes from affordable energy, and the potential jobs creation initiatives that a sound energy policy would and should deliver. Given the current trajectory of an aging infrastructure, decades of restrictions on drilling, failure to tackle the obstacles that prevent both more nuclear plant and clean coal plant projects, frittering at the edges of renewable energy, and avoidance of other energy “hard choices,” within the decade the nation faces an unprecedented energy abyss. p. 3

This is the clearest admission that we have seen about the energy supply situation in the U.S. Hofmeister puts the scope of the problem into focus for those, particularly the management of the bureaucracies, that deny the situation is as dire.

By 2020, there will be inadequate supplies of liquid fuels and electricity taking the nation toward inevitable gas lines, brown-outs, black-outs and extraordinary high prices. p. 3

We need to act. Spending more money to make the problems go away hasn't worked. In fact they have only wasted more time. We need to re-organize our approach to this problem. Re-organize around the Joint Operating Committee with systems and communities dedicated to supporting the innovative oil and gas producer. Otherwise.

The energy abyss will stick around for up to a full decade with all of the national insecurity, economic decline, joblessness and social malaise that accompanies energy shortages in third world countries. p. 3

I don't think that's the future we want to discover for the next twenty years. But if we leave it in the hands of the current management I think that future is certain. All that management have done is denied that the situation exists and avoided developing any solutions. After all, what harm would come to them if they had thrown a few dollars towards People, Ideas & Objects. The managements world is comfortable because they control the budget and therefore nothing can challenge their authority.

The energy industry, despite its technological, geological, chemical, physical, molecular, logistical, scientific and engineering expertise and capacity to deliver affordable energy in endless supply, given all of the natural sources of energy in this country, and the world, will be unable to supply the demand because of public policy constraints. Yet, it will bear the brunt of the blame for energy shortages. p. 3

Whether it is the fault of the public policy constraints as Hofmeister suggests, or managements inaction, either one will be the determining point. If management waits too long, and the public policy falls into line, then we'll know who the real culprit of any energy shortages is.

The nation has to come to grips with its energy future sooner, not later. The time is now not then. p. 3

I realize the tone and topic of this discussion is difficult. We however need to begin approaching these problems in a constructive manner, and that means building the Draft Specification. Our appeal should be based on these eight "Focused on" priorities and values of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not initially be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are. If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Energy Management Failure
 

Ten Days To Go

With ten days left in our 2010 budget drive, we have eight business days to secure our funding. To date we have received no support, no indication, no commitments, nothing. One of the objectives of this funding drive is to provide evidence that the management will never support these developments. They are too conflicted, and are in no hurry to establish any competition for their services. With all that we have discussed here in the past three months, it's surprising that this project doesn't generate the support it needs. I'm obviously unaware of the great systems management has planned or are using today.

With the abysmal amount of money that is spent in oil and gas on software development, we can assure ourselves that nothing is being done. With the lack of financial resources being committed to this project, it is clear that expectations of another group lining up to "break their pick" are surreal. You truly reap what you sow.

Another aspect of management is the clear lack of concern for the markets demand for energy. Management will provide what they can when they can, and the rest is left up to the someone else. It's not their problem. This hands off approach to the marketplace displays managements lack of concern outside of their domain. That may have been the way that business was done in the past. If we all think that way today, then all of our futures will be more uncertain.

With the lack of funding, there is no lack of desire for me to bring this solution to the marketplace. I will agree the probability and possibility have become remote, if not improbable. I will continue to do what I can. Management wins in this scenario, and they will state they see the future in a different light to the one described in this blog. Without the clarity of an issue, being in the news, being on the mindset of everyone, it is difficult to rally the troops to resolve it. Which means of course, we will have to wait for that day when failure does occur.

Another aspect of this budget drive is to establish a certain point in time for me personally. I have sacrificed everything that I have to bring this project to this point. I now know that any failure of this project, temporary or otherwise, is not as a result of my efforts. I see the lack of energy becoming a problem in society, and I did what I could to avoid any difficulties. I no longer feel personally obligated to do what ever is required. Other then writing in this blog and building the community, there is little for me that can be accomplished. The financial resources of the industry are what are needed to move forward, and we will wait for that event to occur.

I am reiterating that the use of the Intellectual Property that has been developed is for the sole purpose and benefit of the communities that are represented at People, Ideas & Objects. Management may feel the opportunity to take these ideas and develop the systems based on this IP for themselves. I am providing notice to them, in this post, that no producer is authorized to use any of the IP that has been developed here at People, Ideas & Objects. Nothing. SAP and the systems vendors are provided with the same notice. The implications of these notices is that management will have to come up with your own ideas, develop them, and bring them to market. Remember, it only took me five years to develop the Draft Specification, I wish you God speed.

March 31, 2010 is the deadline for raising our 2010 operating budget. After which a variety of consequences, such as financial penalties and a loss of at least one years time will occur. Our appeal should be based on the 30 compelling reasons of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Budget Funding Failure Management Energy
 

270 Billion Man Days per Day

That is the number of "man days of labor per day" that are offset by the consumption of 120 million barrels of oil and gas. 270 Billion man days per day.

Here are my calculations. How far can a fully loaded semi-trailer travel at 60 MPH on one barrel of oil? (42 gallons x 6 mpg = 252 miles) How much effort would it take to move that product (80,000 lbs) that distance without the benefit of energy. Lets suggest a man walking with 100 lbs of product @ 3 mph, it would take 800 such men 84 hours to move that weight that distance. That is total of 800 x 84 = 67,200 hours of energy equivalent labor. The world produces approximately 120 million barrels of oil and gas per day. 120 million x 67,200 = 8.064 trillion man hours and 1.008 trillion man days of physical labor offset each day. [Please note I am using the 18,000 (or 270 billion man days) man hours in these calculations as all energy use may not be as efficient as the semi-trailer example noted.] Kind of makes systemic risk and the potential of global warming, 50 years from now, look irrelevant.

Here is what we know. Prices for oil and gas have increased substantially in the past decade. These have fueled record activity, yet we still have an ability to produce only 85 million barrels of oil each day. I suggest we are organizationally constrained and are unable to achieve greater volumes of energy production. The bureaucracy can only run so fast.

We're fooling ourselves if we think we can get along without petroleum based energy or even a small decrease to what we use today. With China, India, Brazil and other countries joining the middle class, the future demand for energy will be significant. We need to solve this problem and that is what People, Ideas & Objects is focused on providing. Moving the organizational construct of the industry to the Joint Operating Committee. The legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural and communication frameworks of the global oil and gas industry.

Management are correct to have recognized this is not their problem. I say this with the greatest volume of sarcasm possible. Who's responsibility is it? To sit and do nothing about the scope of this issue shows a complete failure by those that are responsible. It won't take too much to get out of line in order for the collapse of society as we know and understand it today. If demand begins to develop, or supply becomes more challenged, rationing could precipitate the decline of our standard of living and force us to make choices that we should not have to make. All because the management didn't see that their product became so valuable to society. Maybe they are blind. We should start taking the names of the people that are willing to forgo their use of energy and hold them to it. Any rationing of energy is as logical and costly.

What is the future of this industry? Will it be the bureaucracies that are in power for another 100 years? Do we just let the world figure this one out on their own? Is there money to be made in this environment? It's time we began to take this opportunity and start providing the world with the potential for 2 trillion man days of effort, offset every day. What is our potential? And should we limit it so willingly?

People, Ideas & Objects proposes we build the systems to support the Joint Operating Committee. The design of these systems are detailed in this blog, the Preliminary Research Report, and Draft Specification. A design that moves the compliance and governance of the hierarchy to be in alignment with the five frameworks of the Joint Operating Committee. A design that enables innovation in the earth science and engineering disciplines to accelerate and meet the market demand for energy.

By saying things of this nature I risk alienating the status-quo. I say let them cut my budget. And it's no longer just me talking about this problem. In a blog post today, Professor James Hamilton is noting similar warnings. March 31, 2010 is the deadline for raising our 2010 operating budget. After which a variety of consequences, such as financial penalties and a loss of one years time will occur. Our appeal should be based on the 26 compelling reasons of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Failure Budget Funding Hamilton Energy Economics Leadership
 

Strategy + Business on Oil and Gas

Strategy + Business magazine have put out a short summary of their perspectives on oil and gas. Please note People, Ideas & Objects only concerns itself with the upstream portion of the industry. The marketing and refining are continuous process businesses that are somewhat serviced by the SAP type of ERP application. No comment regarding the downstream portion of the business is included in this summary.

The S + B article talks of the current trends in oil and gas. These being un-conventional gas and the "better" management of supply, particularly by OPEC, to meet the diminishing demand for oil.

Yet, refiners and natural gas producers stand at a critical juncture and need to carefully assess the implications of reducing capacity to bring the overall portfolio in line with new forecasts for future demand and supply. They must also consider how to out-execute competitors; e.g., through better operating approaches and improved use of technology. We envision an escalating M&A and joint-venture environment as companies seek to achieve these advantages in position and operations.

These recommendations resonate with the position of People, Ideas & Objects Draft Specification. The strategy we recommend for the producers to pursue is to focus on developing their scientific and engineering capabilities. And application of that science based capability to their asset base. The following are the S + B recommendations for oil and gas producers.

• Concentrate and invest in areas where you have, or can build, significant capabilities that give you the “right to win.”

• Focus on and nurture your best assets, the ones that are outperforming or that can outperform the competition on the relevant supply curve.

• Divest or shut down lagging assets, permanently or temporarily

• Pursue M&A, and joint ventures, as needed to create or access advantage in position and execution.

Lastly, S + B note that now is the time to prepare for the future of the industry.

With so much uncertainty in the energy sector, one thing is clear: 2010 will be anything but a dull year in the oil and gas industry. Difficult periods are often the best time to prepare your business for expansion and growth. Companies that don’t shrink from the task will be the clear winners when industry conditions improve.

March 31, 2010 is the deadline for raising our 2010 operating budget. After which a variety of consequences, such as financial penalties and a loss of one years time will occur. Our appeal should be based on the 26 compelling reasons of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Strategy Energy
 

We'll be watching...

The Wall Street Journal has an article on the topic of Peak Oil today. The article documents a report prepared by an "Industry Taskforce on Peak Oil and Energy Security". Much like the previous airing of concerns, that energy deliverability is becoming progressively more challenging. Oil and gas industry management are able to brush aside the report with the standard we're not concerned attitude.

But the work of the Industry Taskforce on Peak Oil and Energy Security shouldn't be disparagingly dismissed. Its arguments are well founded and lead it to the conclusion that, while the global downturn may have delayed it by a couple of years, peak oil—the point at which global production reaches its maximum—is no more than five years away. Governments and corporations need to use the intervening years to speed up the development of and move toward other energy sources and increased energy efficiency.

I do not have the requisite understanding of geology and engineering to determine if this peak oil theory is valid. I do know that management feels it's not their problem. I do know that today's global production of 120 million barrels of oil equivalent per day is impressive. I see how the costs associated with oil and gas exploration and production have escalated over the last decade.

For management to assume that the upswing in global oil and gas production will continue is questionable. And appears to me to be an act of denial of some basic facts. It also imputes a convenient lack of accountability within the industry. One that does not consider why costs have escalated so substantially. If they are so confident that peak oil is invalid, where is their data. Who will have the evidence necessary to show that management should have acted and didn't? By then most, if not all of the management, will be toasting themselves and their counterparts from the banking industry on some tropical beach.

If we wait until 2015 to score this gotcha moment then it will be far to late for all the kings men and all the kings horses to put it back together again. There is money to be made in this high energy price environment. We should embrace the opportunities that face us and do all that we can to move to the innovative mindset necessary. My read of the situation is that management are not that interested in working that hard. Muddling along has always worked before. Therefore we should let them know, during this next five years, that we'll be watching.

Is it reasonable to assume, as management does, that by 2015 SAP will become the innovative system they need. We should question management as to how this transition will come about. What about 2020, will the industry have the means to operate at the pace necessary to meet the market demands for energy. Or will management continue to deny the peak oil theory as they move at the snails pace of last century.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Energy Management Peak-Oil
 

Energy companies earnings season.

Energy firm earnings will be coming out in the next few weeks. With today's announcement of 5.7% 4th Quarter GDP growth we should expect to see some performance in the energy stocks. One thing is for certain, is the energy industry continues to change and surprise in terms of where it's moving. As soon as you think things have stabilized, they change again and that is the situation we are seeing. High prices have faded, and are replaced with modestly handsome commodity prices. Write downs of reserves have been met with higher production volumes and increased reserves over production.

A trend toward higher costs continues. Field operations are curtailed with only half as many wells being drilled over the prior year. Service companies are the first to feel the effects of any downturn, and are affected far greater then the producers themselves. Halliburton noted this fact in the Houston Chronicle.

Despite the improvement since the summer, Halliburton's fourth-quarter results suffered compared to a year ago, as drilling slowed amid weak commodity prices and sluggish demand, problems plaguing the entire sector.

Hess Corporation realized many pleasant surprises as their profit, production and reserves were higher then the analysts expectations. This may be the area where the "good" news begins to fade from the next few weeks earnings. The large independents and super majors are able to control more of their activity levels outside the market gyrations, and as a result are able to maintain steady earnings. The smaller independents and small producers will no doubt seek to disappoint.

NEW YORK -- Hess Corp. said Wednesday it swung to fourth-quarter net income of $358 million, or $1.10 a share, from a loss of $74 million, or 23 cents a share in the year-ago period. The New York firm's oil and gas production rose 9.5% to 415,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day. Total revenue rose to $8.56 billion from $7.25 billion. Analysts expected earnings of 83 cents a share and revenue of $7.47 billion, according to a survey by FactSet Research.

One strong trend is the move to shale gas formations. Many are beginning to state that this is a significant and durable trend for the North American marketplace. Gas prices appear to concur.

BP chief: Unconventional gas ‘game changer' in U.S.

Noting that the effects of the additional unconventional gas reserves are having on future Liquefied Natural Gas production from the Middle East. This production is now though to be rerouted to Europe. Putting pressure on the Russian prices which are being depressed by the potential new supply coming to Europe. Though the sluggish demand due to the financial crisis can still be felt, there is optimism in the marketplace.

The knowledge and thinking that the need for new organizations and ways of conducting business is becoming common in the industry. 2010 looks to be the year that People, Ideas & Objects begins the process of developing the Draft Specification and the communities associated with these development begin to form.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Energy
 

Professor George Schultz on MIT Video

In a video entitled "Energy: The Past Must Not Be Prologue". Professor George Schultz reflects on the stop / go mentality regarding energy. During his tenure of the Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan administrations he saw first hand the effects of disjointed and canceled initiatives. Now that we are in a similar situation, and as he notes more dire as a result of the U.S. importing over 60% of their oil needs. He hopes that the situation regarding the long term vision of energy security is fulfilled through a long term commitment.

Secretary Schultz starts his presentation by stating his thesis.

Over the past four decades we have experienced a roller coaster ride on an energy express that has landed us unnecessarily in a place that is dangerous to our economy, our national security and our environment. Now in 2008 we have the chance to realize what we know. We can do something that we should of done long ago, and didn't.

His policies recommendations remind me of how sound the Reagan administration was. One of the stalwarts of the Reagan years was George Schultz in a variety of positions. It is clear in hindsight that he served his country well. His policy recommendations are exactly what needs to be enacted. This is a frustrating topic for him. His attempts to resolve some of these problems in the Nixon administration were obviously frustrated by the politics of the day. Nonetheless he suggests he is optimistic this time, and that this time may be different but we have to get it right and stick to it.

His recommendations are:

Give wind and solar a consistent tax environment. Agreed these will not provide the type of scale of even hydro electricity but everything helps.

Conservation. Disagree, not to suggest we should be wasteful, but energy is the means in which economies operate. Attempts to conserve may be counter to the benefits of the economy. If each barrel of oil offsets 18,000 man hours of physical labor, deferring the use of that energy is counter productive. The costs of one barrel of oil will show the world that at future prices it will remain the best of bargains.

Carbon capture and sequestration. Agreed, CO2 is a miscible agent and therefore has the dual role of pressuring formations and enabling more oil to be separated from the rocks that hold it. The more CO2, the less the cost, the greater the benefit to future production.

Nuclear power, Schultz suggests a careful opening of this means of energy production. Not that nuclear energy production is bad, its the waste and nuclear proliferation that create more problems.

Stop doing some of the dumb things that we are doing. "The encouragement of producing corn based ethanol" is a dumb policy. Agreed more energy is consumed in the entire process then what is produced.

Develop our own oil and gas resources. Or as Sarah Palin says, drill baby drill.

A floor price for oil and gas prices in the U.S. Having a defined value for the resources you find and produce will go a long way to stabilizing the stop / start manner of the energy industry. The costs to the consumers may actually be less in the future.

Heavy spending on basic research. Cites an example in the health debate of how more is being spent on insurance, whereas the reason the quality of health care is so high is the basic research that has been undertaken. Schultz also notes the role of innovation in the development of science.

At around 30:00 minutes Professor Schultz quotes MIT President Susan Hockfield in an impassioned call for sustained energy research.

Lastly at 54:00 minutes he notes the effect of the academic life, or the living in the world of ideas. When he was called upon by government he was always able to leverage the ideas that he knew were around. I think this is something that the users, and most specifically the Community of Independent Service Providers, can do with their career. The Draft Specification is the beginning of the ideas in People, Ideas & Objects. They will be able to be taken and built upon in ways that we can't even imagine today.

As always, if you are a producer and would like to support these communities financially, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and if you are potential user, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Energy MIT Video

Pemex makes the change.

The market for People, Ideas & Objects software application is the oil and gas industry in general. This includes the International Oil Companies (IOC's), National Oil Companies (NOC's), Independents and start-ups. All of which of course use the Joint Operating Committee (JOC) as the means to deal with their partners. All of these types of organizations have the same needs from the point of view of managing their oil and gas assets.

Each barrel of oil equivalent is on a steep upward curve in terms of the volume of science and engineering involved in bringing the products to market. It is this upward cost curve that challenges the bureaucracies to keep up. What they are finding is the pace of change and the demand for innovative thinking is beyond the capabilities of the hierarchical firm. This is the situation for most of the western based producers and service companies.

People, Ideas & Objects approach is particularly unique from the point of view providing the NOC's. Pemex, Saudi Aramco, Petronas and the China National Oil Company to name just a few. Traditionally they have been charged with developing the countries energy resources for the country itself. Whether that is for its internal consumption of energy, management of royalties and / or export. The challenge to them is similar to the IOC's and Independents in that the level of effort per barrel of oil equivalent continues to escalate.

Mexican firm Petroleos Mexicanos is now indicating they will change how they develop their energy resources. In the Oil and Gas Journal, an article documenting the change notes.

Mexico’s state-owned Petroleos Mexicanos and the Secretaria de Energia (Sener) are preparing risk contracts that will be offered to oil companies—international and domestic—in order accelerate the search for oil and gas, according to local media.

These risk contracts have been used with a multitude of other methods by the NOC's before. The one constant is the Joint Operating Committee (JOC) is the means to manage these contracts. Recall the JOC is the legal foundation of the oil and gas industry. This is on a systemic and global basis with IOC's, NOC's etc. Pemex establishes the following framework for these contracts;

Sener explains that it is urgent "to speed up the discovery of new oil fields and the incorporation of reserves, as well as increase Pemex's execution capacity, particularly through new contracting schemes so that specialized companies can support its activities."

Clearly indicating that the support they are looking for not only includes the producer firms but also the service companies. Pemex is one of a number of countries that are establishing this trend as a result of the new realities of the scientific developments of the oil and gas industry.

Evidence of this is reflected in the research of the Baker Institutes Energy Forum's Cases under the heading of "The Role of National Oil Companies in International Energy Markets". In particular I want to highlight the research that was completed on for Malaysia's Petronas NOC. Reading that document clearly reflects the conclusion resonates with the work being done by the People, Ideas & Objects community. It also resonates with Petronas' strategy, history and economic needs.

In 2005 a Vice President of Petronas speaking before the Asian Energy Forum presented the firms corporate strategy. He emphasized several elements including growth and maximizing returns for shareholders. Growth has brought the move towards a global strategy with the desire to be an overseas investor in upstream and downstream sectors as well as encouraging foreign investment in Malaysia, while maximizing shareholder profits; he also noted the company's efforts to benefit local needs through a long term program involving Malaysia, host countries and other firms.

He asserted that it is important for Petronas to work with credible partners for several reasons:

1. Risks mitigation
2. Access to market
3. Access to proprietary technology
4. Political strength
5. Government to government relationship p. 21

In my opinion this strategy is wholly consistent with both the Community of Independent Service Providers (CISP) and People, Ideas & Objects. Why?, due to the activities and operations of Petronas and other NOC's, the IOC's, Independents and start up producers need to align their governance and compliance frameworks with the JOC's legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural and communication frameworks. This alignment brings a transparency  between the participants that increases the accountability of all oil and gas operations for all concerned, irrespective of the individual strategies employed by each participant in the JOC. The current situation where the corporate compliance and governance frameworks are focused only on the individual corporation is inconsistent with the legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural and communication frameworks and operations of the JOC of which they are party to.

By granting a concession, lease, risk contract or any other vehicle to establish these oil and gas operations, a JOC is created. It is therefore necessary that the systems and procedures of those participants to the JOC have the JOC identified, supported and implicit in the day to day and strategic operation.

Additionally, each NOC or government that is interested in optimizing their oil and gas operations, both from a royalty income stream or as an active explorer and producer, want to have their jurisdiction open and active with the remainder of the oil and gas industry. Having the capacity to operate on the same basis of the global oil and gas producers and suppliers provides synergies to all involved. Using a standard system, such as People, Ideas & Objects amongst all participants of the industry enables access to the resources of the service companies, producer firms and other groups that may be involved in the JOC and available through an application based on the Draft Specification.

This also works for Petronas and other NOC's from the point of view of their strategy of wanting to be involved in oil and gas operations on a global basis. They, with standard systems based on the JOC, can easily participate based on known methods and means of operation on a global basis.

This is not a case of nationalization, although nationalism was a factor in its original formation. It has been a generally solid and well-respected partner to both private and state entities around the world. While it has become involved in a wide range of agreements with other companies and states in which its equity percentages has varied, Petronas itself is 100% state owned. It has no present intention to privatize. p. 35

Involving NOC's in the future in this manner is also consistent with the activities of the Baker Institute with their governing objective.

The Baker Institute Energy Forum is a multifaceted center that promotes original, forward-looking discussion and research on the energy-related challenges facing our society in the 21st century.

This future needs to be backed up by a software development capability as provided by the Community of Independent Service Providers and People, Ideas & Objects application modules. Please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Market Organization Science Research Energy Firm

And there's more.

The energy industry does have a problem that is reflected well in today's $81 oil price. The purpose of this blog is to organize and develop the software modules in the Draft Specification. Why we are doing this is that the bureaucracy is constrained and is unable to meet the demands of the consumers in the 21st century. Without abundant energy the world economy will be in jeopardy, as will our way of life.

John B. Hess is the CEO of Hess Corporation, a second generation exploration and production oil and gas company. With a market value of $20 billion they have become one of the U.S.' great independent producers. It's reasonable then to assume that Hess knows what he is talking about. And he does.

In a major statement entitled "Oil and the Future", Hess has released a paper that discusses the energy industries looming supply side crisis. The problem is well defined in this paper. What we need to do is organize ourselves to face this challenge. Without the software that supports and defines the Joint Operating Committee (JOC) we will not be able to rise to this challenge.

Hess goes on to provide sound advice to deal with this problem. His recommendations are the three C's Communication, Courage and Collaboration. The following quotations capture the scope of the problem.

My remarks today will cover “Oil and the Future.” Today, our industry is at a crossroads. Oil has moved to a demand-led market where supply is struggling to keep pace. The financial crisis of the past year has reduced demand by 2 million barrels per day, creating excess inventories and lower prices. While this setback has brought us some welcome breathing room, I believe that it is only temporary. Once economic growth recovers, it is likely we will return to the market conditions of one year ago. The price of $140 per barrel oil was not an aberration; it was a warning.

A warning, indicating that there is time remaining. Our approach should be to get organized first. And for innovative oil and gas producers in the 21st century, getting organized means building the software to define and support the Joint Operating Committee.

Over the past several years, many people in our business have expressed confidence that we were up to meeting the challenges ahead. From the producer perspective, it has been suggested that the remaining global endowment of up to 3 trillion barrels of recoverable oil meant that we should not be concerned with a prospect of shortages. Higher prices, advancing technology and sound government policies would enable supply to keep up with demand. Consuming nations viewed these issues quite differently, criticizing producers for rising prices, blaming oil for climate change and implementing policies to develop alternatives to hydrocarbons. I would suggest there is a major disconnect between consumers and producers.

In this next quotation, Hess defines a break between what the producers see and what they act upon. It's a break that I find interesting in dealing with this problem. Each producer firm is only concerned with their production and do not necessarily see the broader picture. Looking at the horizon they see that such and such heavy oil project and these offshore resources will offset any declines experienced by any of the other producers. In other words the horizon is muddled by too much information.

The approaches of both consumers and producers are based on hope, but what we need is a sober reality. The reality is that an oil crisis is coming that could prove devastating to future economic growth. Given the long lead times of 5-to-10 years from oil discovery to production, we need to act now to avert this outcome. I would like to suggest a framework of three “C’s” to address this threat: communication, courage and collaboration.

All is not lost. Over the course of my career in the oil and gas industry, I have been shocked in terms of its performance. When called upon the industry has been able to deliver, and I would expect the same from this current call. Hess' message is to communicate the facts and eliminate the confusion around this issue.

Given these facts, we need to communicate the following message:

1. Hydrocarbons are here to stay.
2. Oil demand growth will be unrelenting, increasing 1 million barrels per day each year.
3. We are not running out of oil but growth of production capacity over the next several years will fall short of the incremental 5 million barrels per day each year that we will need to meet demand.
4. We will ultimately be at risk of supply rationing demand through skyrocketing prices that will threaten economic stability and prosperity. If we do not act now, we will have a devastating oil crisis in the next 5-to-10 years.

In reading the paper I came to the realization that this is an all interested persons must rise to this challenge. Consumers, International Oil Companies, National Oil Companies, Independent producers, OPEC, and consuming nations.

The stakes have never been higher. We must build a balanced and comprehensive approach to energy security and protection of the environment to ensure sustainable development. We must unite and work together as an industry, communicating one message, having the courage to act and collaborating for the global good. In this world, there will be a bright future, not only for oil, but for many generations to come.

We are a fair distance from resolving this. I have suggested that the ability to conduct appropriate exploration has been lost since the hey day's of the 1960's. Hess is quoted in this paper as stating "Resource additions from exploration last replaced annual production in 1987". We have a job to do, please join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Call-to-Action Change Economics Energy

The Prototypical Producer

"Build it like your going to operate it forever."

That is the expectation of the CEO of BlackPearl Resources Ltd. John Festival, who sold BlackRock Ventures Inc to Shell Canada in 2006 for $2.6 billion. As I mentioned in a recent post companies are being formed with the intent to sell them within a five to ten year window. These people are able to put together a firm and sell it for substantial gains.

Nonetheless the expectation is to "build it like your going to operate it forever". The oil and gas assets of the producer are the value that is being built. Why would anyone approach the building of those assets with anything but the long term perspective. The dichotomy is that you are building the company for a quick sale. A team can put together a valuable producer in a short 5 to 10 year period that can then be sold for multiples of the cost to build the firms.

I see in the BlackRock team the prototypical 21st Century oil and gas producer. The ability to find and develop the resources, build the assets and then sell them to start all over again. It is happening consistently on this grand of scale, it is also happening on a smaller scale where less "proven" teams are building their capabilities up with each successive start up and subsequent sale.

It is these teams that I have in mind as being the ideal candidates for both the People, Ideas & Objects Draft Specification and the associated Community of Independent Service Providers (CISP). My logic is as follows; why does a firm that is focused on developing a firm's assets, based on a team of capable leaders need to burden themselves with the overhead associated with systems, procedures or even the staff to manage the day to day. What if they could access the systems and people necessary to manage their assets development? What if they were to find their most profitable operations were best managed by the CISP and People, Ideas & Objects application modules.

From an outsourcing point of view people will have preconceived ideas of what works and what doesn't. To think of this as just outsourcing limits the opportunity for the producer and the industry as a whole. Adam Smith proved that the division of labor and specialization were the keys to organizational efficiency. Since these concepts were proven they have been the driving force behind all economic growth. Greater specialization and division of labor are what organizations have been able to do to improve their performance since the late 1700's. The Draft Specification considers this as a critical aspect of the systems means of providing the producer with increased speed, innovation and performance.

One of the key aspects of the Accounting Voucher Module is to provide the means to design transactions. A transaction for the purpose of this example is the drilling of a well. The work that will be undertaken by whom and when is defined in the Accounting Voucher as the value adding process. This process is not too much different today as it will be in the future. However, the number of people that would be involved in that transaction may total one thousand people when we consider the producers CEO all the partners staff and on up to the invoice clerk at the water hauling firm. Clearly the division of labor has already been used to good effect.

Now to enhance the capabilities of the producer and particularly the industry, will require a greater division of labor. Lets assume that this transaction in the future may involve triple the numbers of people to successfully complete the transaction. Already the Joint Operating Committee employs only a handful of these people. How many will need to be directly employed by the JOC in this future scenario? Will it be more or less? I think it will require sizable more individuals reporting directly to the Joint Operating Committee.

Many more individuals spending substantially less time then they do today, over a shorter period of time. How will this be handled by the JOC? The ability of having this larger number of people spending less time on a transaction will be one of the direct results and benefits of the Information & Communication Technologies. The ICT can handle this type of activity, and what I am suggesting here is that irrespective of the size of the producer, only the key team of CEO, COO and CFO would need to be in the office at all times. The thousands of people available when and where they are required, managed by the People, Ideas & Objects application modules and the Community of Independent Service Providers.

In this future scenario BlackPearl Resources needs to coordinate and manage the efforts of thousands of individuals who have a significant influence on their success or failure. Some of the key attributes of this is that the "transaction" must be flexible enough to have the influence of the decision makers involved intimately with the aspects of the transactions that they can influence the success of the transactions outcome. For the industry to increase the overall productivity of the people imputes the speed of these transactions will turn over much quicker. If the performance criteria is to drill X wells today, then tomorrow may require X³ wells drilled. Or it may be stated better by saying the engineering, geological and overall work required for each barrel of oil triples.

This is the only method I can see of how the fixed number of people working in the industry can become three times as productive. The market for energy is rewarding these firms with the pricing of the commodity which values all aspects of the producers operation. China, India and the rest of the world is joining the "Western World" and the demand for energy will only increase.

They key to the worlds energy demands being satisfied lies with these teams of people, as represented here by BlackPearl. The ability to do what they do is an intangible that lies in the minds of oilmen. This talent is very rare and very difficult. I don't think that without the motivation of the potential of a billion dollar payday, these teams would form. Which brings me to the point that I mentioned here a few weeks ago. Clearly International Oil Companies are buying most of these producers. National Oil Companies are yet to realize their value in developing their countries resources. What if Pemex were to use these teams to help maintain their production volumes? As I mentioned in that post the idea that these producers are closed behind some communist or dictatorial mindset has receded over the past few decades. The only thing that needs to be done is the IOC's, NOC's and teams fund the development of this software to make this real. And as a key component of the Community of Independent Service Providers, all you need to do is join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Energy Collaboration Community Development Market